5 ms·

To an extent it can be a protected class (and this may even be protected) https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/your-rights/employee-rights https://

To an extent it can be a protected class (and this may even be protected) https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/your-rights/employee-rights https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/your-right...

Justin_K 4y ago
Everything I read about the letter was addressing Musk's behavior and was not related to the formation of a union. Again, my point is merely whether or not law was violated in their firings.
- tamcap 4y ago
  quoting: "A few examples of protected concerted activities are: Two or more employees addressing their employer about improving their pay. Two or more employees discussing work-related issues beyond pay, such as safety concerns, with each other. An employee speaking to an employer on behalf of one or more co-workers about improving workplace conditions." Would that letter fall under that? I think there is at least a somewhat credible claim it could (and also a credible opposing counterclaim that the form of speech was meant to be defamatory/disparaging, and not a protected activity), but I am not a lawyer.
  - dmatech 4y ago
    What he says on his personal Twitter account (unless it's on behalf of the employer) is not a "workplace" concern. There's no right for workers to not have an off-the-job embarrassment as a CEO. Perhaps there is for investors, but that's another concern with different remediations.
    - TheCoelacanth 4y ago
      Your boss's conduct is absolutely part of your workplace conditions. Public figures do not have the luxury of maintaining a strict separation between their working and private lives.
- TrinaryWorksToo 4y ago
  The document I linked describes protections specifically beyond unions, such as two or more employees talking about working conditions.
- btilly 4y ago
  The letter itself is at the end of https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/16/23170228/spacex-elon-musk-internal-open-letter-behavior https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/16/23170228/spacex-elon-musk.... The bit about Musk's behavior gets quoted because it fits with various agendas. But the letter itself is mostly a plea for making SpaceX a more inclusive workplace for people of different races, genders, and so on. To establish clear HR policies rather than current vague rules like "no assholes". That's pretty far into the protected category of talking about improving workplace conditions.
  - dmix 4y ago
    Activists calling for more inclusion are not the protected class here regardless, even if the people they want to be hired or promoted may be (under certain circumstances).
    - lalaland1125 4y ago
      Talking about workplace issues in the workplace is a protected class
      - neltnerb 4y ago
        I have the feeling that people like musk or that crypto CEO yesterday are just chomping at the bit for the opportunity to appeal to the supreme court. Someone will get to have their name attached to the decision declaring any government interference in how a business is run unconstitutional. Unions, 40 hour work week, desegregation, certainly employment discrimination, OSHA, the ADA? I worry people like Musk know they have the money to take it that far and that the supreme court would love to completely deregulate businesses.
        achenet 4y ago
        > Someone will get to have their name attached to the decision declaring any government interference in how a business is run unconstitutional. Congress has the power to regulate commerce. [0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commerce_clause https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commerce_clause "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; To borrow money on the credit of the United States; To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;" [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section8 https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section8

Justin_K 4y ago

Everything I read about the letter was addressing Musk's behavior and was not related to the formation of a union. Again, my point is merely whether or not law was violated in their firings.

tamcap 4y ago
quoting: "A few examples of protected concerted activities are: Two or more employees addressing their employer about improving their pay. Two or more employees discussing work-related issues beyond pay, such as safety concerns, with each other. An employee speaking to an employer on behalf of one or more co-workers about improving workplace conditions." Would that letter fall under that? I think there is at least a somewhat credible claim it could (and also a credible opposing counterclaim that the form of speech was meant to be defamatory/disparaging, and not a protected activity), but I am not a lawyer.
- dmatech 4y ago
  What he says on his personal Twitter account (unless it's on behalf of the employer) is not a "workplace" concern. There's no right for workers to not have an off-the-job embarrassment as a CEO. Perhaps there is for investors, but that's another concern with different remediations.
  - TheCoelacanth 4y ago
    Your boss's conduct is absolutely part of your workplace conditions. Public figures do not have the luxury of maintaining a strict separation between their working and private lives.
TrinaryWorksToo 4y ago
The document I linked describes protections specifically beyond unions, such as two or more employees talking about working conditions.
btilly 4y ago
The letter itself is at the end of https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/16/23170228/spacex-elon-musk-internal-open-letter-behavior https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/16/23170228/spacex-elon-musk.... The bit about Musk's behavior gets quoted because it fits with various agendas. But the letter itself is mostly a plea for making SpaceX a more inclusive workplace for people of different races, genders, and so on. To establish clear HR policies rather than current vague rules like "no assholes". That's pretty far into the protected category of talking about improving workplace conditions.
- dmix 4y ago
  Activists calling for more inclusion are not the protected class here regardless, even if the people they want to be hired or promoted may be (under certain circumstances).
  - lalaland1125 4y ago
    Talking about workplace issues in the workplace is a protected class
    - neltnerb 4y ago
      I have the feeling that people like musk or that crypto CEO yesterday are just chomping at the bit for the opportunity to appeal to the supreme court. Someone will get to have their name attached to the decision declaring any government interference in how a business is run unconstitutional. Unions, 40 hour work week, desegregation, certainly employment discrimination, OSHA, the ADA? I worry people like Musk know they have the money to take it that far and that the supreme court would love to completely deregulate businesses.
      - achenet 4y ago
        > Someone will get to have their name attached to the decision declaring any government interference in how a business is run unconstitutional. Congress has the power to regulate commerce. [0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commerce_clause https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commerce_clause "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; To borrow money on the credit of the United States; To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;" [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section8 https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section8